Justice Alito Obliterates Trans Ideology Effortlessly in Oral Arguments

Matt Margolis : Jan 14, 2026
PJ Media

The emperor has no clothes, and Justice Alito made sure everyone could see it.

[PJMedia.com] Justice Samuel Alito was on fire Tuesday during oral arguments in Little v. Hecox and utterly destroyed Kathleen R. Hartnett, the attorney representing a biological male student who wants to play sports on the girls' team. His questioning cut right through activist jargon and forced the case onto solid legal ground, revealing just how contorted the arguments become when ideology collides with biological reality. (Screengrab image: via SupremeCourt.gov )

For instance, when transgender activists are asked a simple question—"What is a woman?"—the response is usually a circular word salad claiming that "a woman is anyone who identifies as a woman." Using a word to define itself explains nothing, and that logical void is exactly what Alito went after, exposing how much of this ideology collapses under basic scrutiny.

"How can a court determine whether there's discrimination on the basis of sex without knowing what sex means for equal protection purposes?" Alito asked Hartnett.

And Hartnett's response was as telling as it was moronic.

She essentially punted, saying they would just accept the statute's definition that the athlete in question "qualifies as a birth sex male" and was "being excluded categorically from the women's teams."

As usual, she wanted to have it both ways—accepting biological reality for the sake of argument while still claiming discrimination. Alito wasn't about to let that slide.

He constructed a straightforward hypothetical of a student with male genes, a male reproductive system, who never took puberty blockers or hormones, never had surgery, but simply declares, "Nevertheless, I am a woman. That's who I am."

Recommended: Smells Like Hypocrisy: Nirvana Bassist Torches the Left's Outrage Over Deportations

With that set up, he went ahead. "Can the school say, 'No, you cannot participate on the girls' team?'"

Hartnett stumbled through her response, seeking clarification about whether Alito meant "a birth sex male who has all the advantages of birth sex male hormones." When Alito confirmed that's exactly what he meant, she conceded, "Yes, they can" bar such a person from the women's team.

But Alito pressed further with the question that matters: "Is that person not a woman in your understanding? If the person says, 'I sincerely believe I am a woman. I am, in fact, a woman.' Is that person not a woman?"

Hartnett's answer exposed the entire charade... Subscribe for free to Breaking Christian News here

Continue reading Here.